I rather believe Djo than LeeD, who asserts that Djok "doesn't know what he's talking about". Which has a higher probability of happening here: Djo not knowing the tennis stroke he's describing or guys like LeeD knowing what the pinnacle of tennis is like?

We may not be experts in biomechanics but I am willing to wager a tidy sum that I've done more reading/studying the subject that Novak Djoko has. I've also been playing the game twice long as he has (some 20 years longer) -- I've managed to pick up quite a bit of knowledge on tennis theory in my scant 40 years of playing (even tho' I did not start til I was nearly 21). I believe that LeeD has been playing longer than I have and has also garnered quite a bit of insight in those years.

While Novak has achieved an extremely high level of skill in tennis, much of his tennis knowledge is at a subconscious kinesthetic level. This does not necessarily translate to the ability to analyze stroke mechanics and teach it effectively to others. Those are different cognitive skills than the highly-developed kinesthetic intelligence that Novak possesses.

Also keep in mind that English is not Novak's mother tongue. He may or may not be able to accurately describe the nuances of his own stroke production in English (or even in his native tongue for that matter).

Novak may very well be able to perceive his own strokes in a certain way whether that perception is technically accurate or not. His flawed instruction may very well work for some students of the game. However, for many others, it could lead to exaggerated/forced wrist actions or flawed stroke mechanics that could be detrimental to their tennis or, worse, to their body.

While Novak may be aware of the concept of pronation, it is possible that he may lost if you start talking about supination, internal shoulder rotation, ulnar deviation, etc. Note that many high-level touring pros could not tell you the difference between a full Western grip, a semi-Western grip and a Kung Fu grip.

Can we even define what wrist snap is?
I feel like i have "wrist snap" because my wrist seems to move from a backwards position before contact with the ball to a forwards position very quickly. Do i actually use wrist muscles to make that forward momentum? ... I don't know - i would have thought so but some convincing points have been made. One thing i do know is that my playing arm has much bigger wrist/forearm muscles than my non playing arm.

Have you ever tried hitting a forehand without using any wrist muscles?.. It doesn't work. You need to use your wrist muscles for an effective shot. Honestly, pick up a racquet now and shadow a forehand while trying to use the least amount of wrist/forearm muscles as possible. Your shot should just feel wrong because your "wrist snap" will be missing. However, maybe we should just call it "wrist pronation". Maybe "wrist pronation" and "wrist snap" are the same thing anyway.

^ There is no concise definition for wrist snap. When most students are asked to snap the wrist, the most common response is to attempt to move the wrist from an extreme laid-back position (extension) to an extreme flexion position (bent forward) very quickly. In reality, the wrist is usually c0cked back at the start of the forward swing or the upward swing (in the case of the serve) and moves to a position that is either neutral or a position that is less c0cked than it was before. The c0cking of the wrist can be a combination of wrist extension and wrist deviation (ulnar or radial).

The wrist should not move to a position of flexion prior to contact (or at contact). The wrist is fairly neutral after contact as well. In some cases, for some players, the wrist might go slightly past a neutral position after contact. However, it should not assume an extreme flexion (as one might be tempted to do if told to snap the wrist).

Pronation is not an articulation of the wrist -- it is a forearm rotation -- an action to turn the hand. On the serve and overhead smash, what many refer to as wrist snap is really a combination of forearm pronation with some unc0cking of the wrist.

You are wrong about the forehand. It can be hit very effectively without a wrist action. The classic FH (typically with an Eastern FH grip) is usually hit without unc0cking the wrist at all -- it remains laid-back. I have also seen some decent FHs hit w/o c0cking the wrist at all -- it remains fairly neutral for the whole stroke. However, this variation is/was less common.

These classic FHs typically employed a moderate amount of pronation on the forward swing. The modern (WW) forehand uses some wrist action on the forward swing with, perhaps, more pronation than the classic FH.
.

well i have an eastern forehand and i have a moderate amount of wrist pronation. I find that i have to flex my wrist/forearm muscles to ensure wrist pronation. These muscles are being used to maintain this position until the point of contact. How do you explain my larger wrist/forearm muscles in my playing arm.

If there is no definition/agreement of what wrist snap is, you can't argue whether it is or isn't a real phenomenon. You said that modern strokes have wrist action - why can't we call this "wrist snap"?. The cocked wrist position involved with wrist snap is not actually laid back, the muscles in the forearm are used for this to happen disregarding forward wrist action.

^ The WW or modern FH can be hit with an Eastern grip. Federer does it all the time. You may be mixing up wrist flexion with wrist extension. The latter is laying the wrist back. Flexion is in the opposite direction. The wrist does not have to been unc0cked in order to pronate the forearm.

Note that you incorrectly referred to pronation as "wrist pronation". It is the forearm that pronates -- ultimately it turns the hand holding the racket. If you are going to call it something other than forearm pronation why not refer to it as "hand" pronation rather than wrist pronation?

If there is no definition/agreement of what wrist snap is, you can't argue whether it is or isn't a real phenomenon. You said that modern strokes have wrist action - why can't we call this "wrist snap"?. The cocked wrist position involved with wrist snap is not actually laid back, the muscles in the forearm are used for this to happen disregarding forward wrist action.

You may call it wrist snap if you want but the problem is that this terminology is misleading and sometimes detrimental . More often than not, it encourages the student to perform unwanted violent/exaggerated wrist actions -- too much forward flexion of the wrist. This is my objection to the terminology. 30+ years ago, I was instructed to snap the wrist for tennis serves and badminton overheads. It produced incorrect actions of the wrist. It took me quite a while to unlearn this. I've seen the same thing happen numerous other players.

If you are going to tell a student to "snap the wrist", you must demonstrate exactly what is meant by your instruction. You must also keep a watchful eye that the student's wrist does not end up with an extreme flexion caused by a violent action of the wrist. Such an action can be detrimental to the wrist and forearm.

Not sure what you mean by your very last statement (bolded). Are you referring to supination (the opposite rotation to pronation).
.

^ The WW or modern FH can be hit with an Eastern grip. Federer does it all the time. You may be mixing up wrist flexion with wrist extension. The latter is laying the wrist back. Flexion is in the opposite direction. The wrist does not have to been unc0cked in order to pronate the forearm.

Note that you incorrectly referred to pronation as "wrist pronation". It is the forearm that pronates -- ultimately it turns the hand holding the racket. If you are going to call it something other than forearm pronation why not refer to it as "hand" pronation rather than wrist pronation?

You didn't really address my posts, you just picked up on the minutiae. Yes i do hit a modern ww eastern forehand. No i am not mixing up wrist extension and wrist flexion. "The wrist does not have to been unc0cked in order to pronate the forearm." This doesn't make sense to me, are you confusing c0cked and unc0cked?

You may call it wrist snap if you want but the problem is that this terminology is misleading. More often than not, it encourages the student to perform unwanted violent/exaggerated wrist actions -- to much forward flexion of the wrist. This is my objection to the terminology. 30+ years ago, I was instructed to snap the wrist for tennis serves and badminton overheads. It produced incorrect actions of the wrist. It took me quite a while to unlearn this. I've seen the same thing happen numerous other players.

If you are going to tell a student to "snap the wrist", you must demonstrate exactly what is meant by your instruction. You must also keep a watchful eye that the student's wrist does not end up with an extreme flexion caused by a violent action of the wrist. Such an action can be detrimental to the wrist and forearm.

Not sure what you mean by your very last statement (bolded). Are you referring to supination (the opposite rotation to pronation).
.

ahh yes i agree with that. I never really liked the term either, always thought it could be misleading. Nevertheless the term made sense to me personally. I would call it something else too.

First, video has convinced me that I don't necessarily know what I'm doing in a high level of detail. I assume the same holds for a lot of the pros.

Second, I'd guess that the forearm muscles that control wrist movement are firing off when all of us play, just to hold onto the racket and to keep the wrist from collapsing back too much against the momentum of the racket and the pulling forward of the arm by much stronger muscles in the body.

As far as the use of the wrist on the serve, I'm not a fan of the term wrist-snap. However, "wrist-snap" is taught to high level players as I've personally witnessed. I've seen, for example, Raonic's coach showing him wrist snap in practice. Raonic's serve, imo, doesn't really use much wrist snap, but I'm sure the wrist (meaning forearm muscles) are very active just prior and at contact, just to hold onto the racket if nothing else.

It seems to me that the best servers, are actually slowing the upper arm just prior to contact and this is driving a great amount of the force into internal shoulder rotation and pronation and forearm strength is necessary to deliver this power to the ball.

Good take on the issue. I agree that the passive/active argument could be a false/misleading dichotomy.
.

"The cocked wrist position involved with wrist snap is not actually laid back"
What i meant by this was that hand pronation / c0cked wrist actually involves using your forearm muscles to keep it in that position - those muscles are flexing.

"The cocked wrist position involved with wrist snap is not actually laid back"
What i meant by this was that hand pronation / c0cked wrist actually involves using your forearm muscles to keep it in that position - those muscles are flexing.

Still not following. Are you referring to supination of the forearm? The forearm is often supinated in the prep phase so that it can pronate on the forward or upward swing. To me, a c0cked wrist is one that is laid-back -- often wrist extension or wrist extension combined with ulnar/radial deviation.

right before contact on my E fh, my hand is completely supinated but also fully extended as well. the latter can be finely controlled to control the ball. during pronation keep it extended for more topspin or flex some to impart more horizontal velocity to the ball when hitting a higher ball.

I'm a bit confused.
This thread seems to have proposed, through different ideas, two starkly different candidates for what one means by "wrist snap," perhaps both being correct.

1. The "wrist snap" is the quick change in position of the hand from laid-back to nearly in line with the forearm (the hand becoming less extended), which can be achieved without any forearm pronation:

2. The "wrist snap" is a deliberate pronation of the forearm shortly before contact and continues to complete a WW wiper-like forehand follow-through, possibly with some flexion as Anatoliy showed with Monfils.

Now, is the main question whether either of these "snaps" requires any immediate/last-second input from the player (as opposed to simply a passive result of proper prep/takeback/grip/etc.)?

From personal experience, I can say that for me, number 1 happens without any additional last-minute tweaks of the wrist.

EDIT: Best to never again say the words "wrist" and "snap" together ever again; everyone will be better off

Here's the deal:
Some people intentionally flex their wrists. Some people don't.
Most pros today do not intentionally flex. (we're talking typical rally ball here, not some situational out of position off balance type of shot)
It happens naturally as a result of the stretch-shortening cycle. (ssc). If you don't know what ssc is look it up.

Players who don't use ssc and use their wrists intentionally seem to have a mental block or something when it comes to the possibility that a different type of swing can exist. No matter how many threads there are, how many explanations by top coaches on websites there are, testimonials from people who use this technique etc etc they just can't see it or won't believe it.

I'm telling you that you can swing and get tons of spin, more racquet head spead, a smoother stroke and better follow through using ssc as the main engine and not doing anything with the wrist. The pics posted in this thread are of players who all use this technique. You can use ssc to engage flexation as well as pronation. Trust me. I swing w/ this technique. It takes a LOT of work to get rid intentionally flexing during the swing. You need to get the kinetic chain working correctly from ground to racquet head. Once you learn it you'll see that it's easier, easier on the body and contact feels better. If anything a player who is swinging with this technique will sometimes give a little intentional radial deviation on the wrist.

IMO you need to have a good core rotation to swing this way. Arming the ball seems to work against / prevent / hamper a loose wrist-no intentional flex-ssc swing.

I used to be a wrist snapper so I understand the resistance. And there's nothing wrong with intentionally flexing. It's just another way to swing.

I can generate a lot of spin on my shots and while it looks like my wrist is doing it, it is really my forearm. I know this because my right forearm has gotten a litle bigger than my left from playing so much. I also know this because i had wrist tendinitis that was pretty bad, and i simply can not go out there and wrist shots.

Also djokovic does not hit flat, he uses a full western grip and generates a lot of spin. You dont have to roll over the ball to hit with a lot of spin. in fact that can end up being counter productive.

Cheetah, if your post is directed at me re-starting this thread (and possibly repeating what others have said), I apologize for taking up your time; I am not in need of explanation, as I too have exploited the strech-shortening cycle by staying completely relaxed through the swing.

My question was more as to why posters were debating what wrist snap is, and what part of the swing they are attributing it to.
But I guess this is pointless, since it is better to completely get rid of the phrase "wrist snap" in tennis instruction/colloquialism.
Thanks.

Good take on the issue. I agree that the passive/active argument could be a false/misleading dichotomy.

And I agree with you that the whole idea of "wrist snap" as commonly taught is misleading and can lead to players trying to do harmful things. Most of that snapping motion, like what you see on a Sampras serve video in slow motion, is what we perhaps incorrectly call "pronation" or is really internal shoulder rotation and not the snapping wrist flexion that is normally demonstrated.

I believe that most players should focus on the proper serve motion and little thought should be given the the wrist at all. Video is probably the best way to achieve this.